Base revision for ontology debugging

Journal of Logic and Computation

Volumn 19, Issue 5, 2009, Pages 721-743

  Ribeiro, Márcio M ^a   Wassermann, Renata ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SÃO PAULO   (Brazil)

Author keywords

Belief Revision; Description Logics; Ontology Evolution

Indexed keywords

BELIEF REVISION; DESCRIPTION LOGIC; DESCRIPTION LOGICS; KNOWLEDGE BASE; ONTOLOGY DEBUGGING; ONTOLOGY EVOLUTION;

DATA DESCRIPTION; KNOWLEDGE BASED SYSTEMS;

ONTOLOGY;

EID: 70349687559     PISSN: 0955792X     EISSN: 1465363X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/logcom/exn048     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (45)

1. C. Alchourrón and D. Makinson. Hierarchies of regulation and their logic. New Studies in Deontic Logic, R. Hilpinen, ed., pp. 125-148. D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht- Holland, 1981.
2. C. Alchourrón and D. Makinson. On the logic of theory change: contraction functions and their associated revision functions. Theoria, 48, 14-37, 1982.
3. C. Alchourrón and D. Makinson. On the logic of theory change: safe contraction. Studia Logica, 44, 405-422, 1985.
4. C. Alchourrón, P. Gärdenfors, and D. Makinson. On the logic of theory change. Journal of Symbolic Logic, 50, 510-530, 1985.
5. F. Baader, D. Calvanese, D. McGuinness, D. Nardi, and. P. Patel-Schneider, eds. The Description Logic Handbook. Cambridge University Press, New York, 2003.
6. F. Baader and R. Penaloza. Axiom pinpointing in general tableaux. In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Automated Reasoning with Analytic Tableaux and Related Methods TABLEAUX 2007, pp. 11-27. Springer. LNAI, Aix-en-Provence, France, 2007.
7. T. Berners-Lee, J. Hendler, and O. Lassila. The semantic web: a new form of web content that is meaningful to computers will unleash a revolution of new possibilities. Scientific American, 284, 34-43, 2001.
8. M. Dean, G. Schreiber, S. Bechhofer, F. van Harmelein, J. Hendler, I. Horrocks, D. L. McGuinness, P. F. Patel-Schneider, and L. A. Stein. OWL Web Onotology Language Reference. W3C Recomendation, 2004. Available at http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/
9. G. Flouris. On Belief Change and Ontology Evolution. PhD thesis, University of Crete, Department of Computer Science, Heraklion, Greece, 2006.
10. G. Flouris, D. Plexousakis, and G. Antoniou. Generalizing the AGM postulates: preliminary results and applications. In Proceedings of the 10th InternationalWorkshop on Non-Monotonic Reasoning 2004 (NMR-04), pp. 171-179.Westin Whistler Resort and Spa, Whistler BC, Canada, 2004.
11. G. Flouris, D. Plexousakis, and G. Antoniou. On applying theAGM theory to DLs and OWL. In Proceedings of the International SemanticWeb Conference, pp. 216-231. Springer, New York, 2005.
12. G. Flouris, D. Plexousakis, and G. Antoniou. Updating description logics using theAGMtheory. In Proceedings of the 7th International Symposium on Logical Formalizations of Commonsense Reasoning, pp. 69-76. Dresden University Technical Report (ISSN 1430-211X), Corfu, Greece, 2005.
13. G. Flouris, D. Plexousakis, andG. Antoniou. On generalizing the agm postulates. In Proceedings of the 3rd European Starting AI Researcher Symposium (STAIRS-06), pp. 132-146. IOS Press, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2006.
14. G. Flouris, Z. Huang, J. Z. Pan, D. Plexousakis, and H. Wache. Inconsistencies, negations and changes in ontologies. In Proceedings of the AAAI, pp. 1295-1300. AAAI Press, California, 2006.
15. A. Fuhrmann. Theory contraction through base contraction. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 20, 175-203, 1991.
16. J. R. Galliers. Autonomous belief revision and communication. In Belief Revision, P. Gärdenfors, ed., Vol.29 of Lecture Notes in Cambridge Tracts in Theoretical Computer Science, pp. 220-246. Cambridge University Press, New York, 1992.
17. P. Gärdenfors. Knowledge in Flux - Modeling the Dynamics of Epistemic States. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1988.
18. P. Gärdenfors and H. Rott. Belief revision. In Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming, D.M. Gabbay, C. J. Hogger and J. A. Robinson, eds., Vol.IV, pp. 35-132. Oxford University Press, 1995.
19. P. Haase and Y. Sure. State-of-the-art on Ontology Evolution. SEKT Informal Deliverable 3.1.1.b, Institute AIFB, University of Karlsruhe, Karlsruhe, 2004.
20. C. Halaschek-Wiener, Y. Katz, and B. Parsia. Belief base revision for expressive description logics. In Proceedings of the OWL: Experiences and Directions 2006, 2006. Available at http://sunsite.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/ Publications/CEUR-WS//Vol-216/ submission-21.pdf
21. S. Ove Hansson. Belief Base Dynamics. PhD Thesis, Department of Philosophy, Uppsala University, Upsala, Sweden, 1991.
22. S. Ove Hansson.Adyadic representation of belief. In Belief Revision, P. Gärdenfors, ed.,Vol. 29 of Lecture Notes in Cambridge Tracts in Theoretical Computer Science, pp. 89-121. Cambridge University Press, New York, 1992.
23. S. Ove Hansson. Reversing the Levi identity. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 22, 637-639, 1992.
24. S. Ove Hansson. Kernel contraction. Journal of Symbolic Logic, 59, 845-859, 1994.
25. S. Ove Hansson. Semi-revision. Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logic, 7, 151-175, 1997.
26. S. Ove Hansson. A survey of non-prioritized belief revision. Erkenntnis, 50, 413-427, 1999.
27. S. Ove Hansson. A Textbook of Belief Dynamics. Kluwer Academic Press, New York, 1999.
28. S. Ove Hansson and RenataWassermann. Local change. Studia Logica, 70, 49-76, 2002.
29. I. Horrocks, U. Sattler, and S. Tobies. Practical reasoning for expressive description logics. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Logic for Programming and Automated Reasoning (LPAR'99),H. Ganzinger,D. McAllester, and A.Voronkov, eds.Vol. 1705 in Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 161-180. Kluwer Academic Press, New York, 1999.
30. I. Horrocks and P. Patel-Schneider. ReducingOWLentailment to description logic satisfiability. In Proceedings of the 2nd International SemanticWeb Conference (ISWC), pp. 17-29. Springer, New York, 2003.
31. I. Horrocks and P. Patel-Schneider. ReducingOWLentailment to description logic satisfiability. Journal of Web Semantics, 1, 345-357, 2004.
32. A. Kalyanpur,B. Parsia, and E. Sirin. Black box techniques for debugging unsatisfiable concepts. In Description Logics, I. Horrocks, U. Sattler, and F. Wolter, eds, Vol.147 of Lecture Notes in CEUR Workshop Proceedings. CEUR-WS.org, 2005.
33. A. Kalyanpur, B. Parsia, E. Sirin, and J. A. Hendler. Debugging unsatisfiable classes in owl ontologies. Journal of Web Semantie, 3, 268-293, 2005.
34. A. Kalyanpur. Debugging and repair of owl ontologies. PhD Thesis, Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Maryland, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, 2006.
35. S. H. Kang and S. K. Lau. Ontology revision on the semantic web: integration of belief revision theory. In HICSS '07: Proceedings of the 40th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, p. 61. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, CA, USA, 2007.
36. D. Makinson. Screened revision. Theoria, 63, 14-23, 1997.
37. L. D. McGuinness and F. van Harmelen. OWL Web Ontology Language Overview. W3c recommendation,WorldWideWeb Consortium, Cambridge, MA, 2004.
38. T. Meyer, K. Lee, R. Booth, and Jeff Z. Pan. Finding maximally satisfiable terminologies for the description logic ALC. In Proceedings of the AAAI. pp. 269-274. AAAI Press, Menlo Park, California, 2006.
39. B. Nebel. Reasoning and Revision in Hybrid Representation Systems.Vol. 422 of Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1990.
40. A. Newell. The knowledge level. Artificial Intelligence, 18, 87-127, 1982.
41. N. F. Noy and D. L. McGuinness. Ontology development 101: a guide to creating your first ontology. Technical Report KSL-01-05. Knowledge Systems Laboratory, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, 94305, USA, 2001.
42. R. Reiter. A theory of diagnosis from first principles. Artificial Intelligence, 32, 57-95, 1987.
43. M. M. Ribeiro and R. Wassermann. First steps towards revising ontologies. In Proceedings of the SecondWorkshop on Ontologies and their Applications (WONTO 2006), 2006.Available at http://ftp.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/ Publications/CEUR-WS/Vol-199/wonto-03.pdf
44. S. Schlobach and R. Cornet. Non-standard reasoning services for the debugging of description logic terminologies. In IJCAI, G. Gottlob and T. Walsh, eds, pp. 355-362. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, CA, 2003.
45. R. Wassermann. An algorithm for belief revision. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR2000), pp. 345-352. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, CA, 2000.